Human Resources Committee on May 12th, 2009

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

I just wanted to say, again, thanks for coming. It's always very helpful to hear from folks like you.

This afternoon I heard a call across the board for leadership. I heard a call for delivering programs through community-based, not-for-profit people who know the people, who know the community, who can deliver. I also heard, though, that you're running out of money and resources, so there needs to be more of those put into the system somehow.

You've travelled with Claudette across the country. I travelled across the country, about two years ago, looking at poverty. When you look at poverty, you can't help but see homelessness. It's in front of you. There are so many really well-meaning groups working 24/7, using every ounce of resources that they have to try to provide and support. They are getting tired, getting grey, and running out of money. I've heard the same message here today.

I wanted to focus on one thing that came from that trip I took, and I heard it mentioned a couple of times across the panel today. It's a question of a leadership. In Calgary, for example, there are 3,500 to 4,000 people on the street any given night. It's quite ironic actually. You have the epitome and sign of new wealth--oil and everything--but at the base of those towers you have these folks. The city council at that time, two years ago, was passing laws to make it criminal behaviour to be homeless. You couldn't sleep in parks. You couldn't sleep under bridges. You couldn't walk in the malls to get warm. There was one shelter for 1,200 people bedding down per night. There were other smaller shelters in the suburbs, where they were moving people around. There was probably a maximum of 2,000 people. So there are another 1,500 or more that are out there running around trying to find a place to sleep so they don't get picked up or whatever.

Susan, you mentioned restorative justice. If we're going to criminalize these people, we'd better be doing something or else our jails are going to be filled. You mentioned that we're putting mentally ill people in jail, which to me is absolutely unconscionable. I guess I'm looking for a response to that. How do we stop that?

[Dr. Susan Crouse]

One of the difficulties I see with the criminal system is that if people need help with things like drugs and alcohol, and those problems land them into trouble with the law, unless they get into the federal system, i.e. get over two years, they are in a provincial system where they get no treatment for their drug and alcohol problems, which is really sad, because that's really what got them into that spot in the first place.

I am a big fan of restorative justice, because I've seen it work. We have a lot of ex-offenders that come to our clinic, and I've seen it work. They're contributing back to communities, working in schools and stuff, because they can reconcile with themselves, really. I think that's what it comes down to.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Are you aware that we have a bill coming before the House that is requiring mandatory minimum sentence for smoking pot?

Anyway, that's leadership of a different sort. Maybe we'll hear from Ed on that a bit. He'll be up next. He was a lawyer at one point before we got into this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

He'll be able to clarify the record.

[Dr. Susan Crouse]

We think we even have pot in our water, because everybody we test has pot. That's going to be a tough one.

[Sue Rickards]

Could I just comment on the general direction you're going in here? I just went to a conference last week on crime reduction strategy. Well, it sounded like the same conference on poverty reduction strategy. All of these have so many common threads, whether it's crime or education, why aren't these kids staying in school, blah, blah, blah. There are addiction problems, FAS/FAE problems that are undiagnosed, learning disabilities. All of these things contribute. Of course, poverty is the most obvious determinant of poor health, low education, and all of that stuff.

The problem we keep bumping up against always is structural. It's the silos of the government that make it virtually impossible to work holistically with people who have a range of issues, and trying to beat on every door. That's why we're tired. That's why we're played out and exhausted, because you can get this program here and this program there and this program from this level.... Oh yeah, we want training, but you can't call it training if you're talking to the feds because they devolved training to the province. So we can only talk about training to the provincial government. When we talk to the feds, we have to say life skills.

Learning all this stuff, it really wears you down when you're a volunteer—and even when you're not a volunteer, but somebody like Donna, who spent her working life on the poverty line, probably working in a non-profit organization that struggles with all these issues every day.

[Bethany Thorne-Dykstra]

If I could just say one thing, I think what's most disturbing is when you do find real issues, like the housing one I mentioned, of empty units being heated and landlords getting money and no people in the building, and you go to your government, in a closed meeting, and you go with two departments.... We've met in closed-door meetings with the departments of social development and energy about the issue. They don't take you seriously.

I don't feel proud that we had to shame them in front of the media to highlight the issue, just to get it heard, for them to take action. I'm not proud of it, but I will do it. I will do it, because someone had to address that. Within six days, 200 people in this province got housed, after we went public. They had to continually keep working on that file. Everyone dropped everything and started fixing up units and getting people in there after that point.

I hate working that way. I don't feel any of us should have to do that. I think there's something broken when we can't have a respectful meeting and deal with issues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

We're going to move to Mr. Komarnicki, for seven minutes.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Certainly poverty is a most serious issue. The burden is on many of you on the ground who need to deal with that. It's not an illness, as you suggest, but an event that needs to be overcome. We appreciate the work that you do.

I do sense a measure of frustration and perhaps overtiring and overburdening that's taking place among many of you who face this head-on on the street level. I know we've heard from a number of witnesses in terms of how programs are designed, how moneys are put out there.

Sue Rickards, I appreciate your spunk and your saying that some of the off-the-wall ideas may not be so bad. Maybe we need to rethink how we're delivering some of these programs, and listen more to what's happening on the ground to ensure that we're meeting needs as opposed to funding specific area programs whether the need is there or not. I take that to heart.

Perhaps we should call this report the upside-down, inside-out report, like you were suggesting, and look at it from a different perspective. I appreciate all of your comments.

One of the specific items was how you get people out of that cycle. Some you won't, and I appreciate that. You'll need to deal with them perhaps differently. But a lot of the words that I've heard today and earlier, as well as yesterday, were about empowering many to move out of their circumstances.

I realize we need a collaborative effort from various levels of government. We need to work in harmony. We need to integrate what we're doing. What are some specific examples, Susan, that you might suggest in terms of empowering people who find themselves in circumstances to get out of them? And that's to anyone else who may want to share.

We seem to be doing well at looking at attending to the consequences of the events as opposed to preventative action. So if you have any suggestions, I'd like to hear them.

[Dr. Susan Crouse]

I'll can give you an example from our clinic.

As mentioned, we work with drug addicts. One of our clients came. I'm okay to share this, because she's cool with it. She was a drug addict. She was selling cocaine. She came to us for help. She is now employed as one of our part-time administrative assistants. She's recognizing people on the street who need help and bringing them into the clinic. She has actually adopted one of the daughters of a street worker and has gotten married. And now she is looking at going off and getting further training so that she can set up a women's recovery centre.

This is a lady who probably reads at below a grade eight level. We make accommodations for that in the office. When we do our computer stuff, we have to interpret what she's writing, but she now feels part of what's helping her. She can move on, and then that position will be opened to somebody else.

That's an example for us. We have people who now do some cleaning in the office and are working at setting up cleaning businesses. It is those types of things. We are giving them real jobs and paying them good money, not just $7.50 an hour. We are giving them health insurance and things that they can invest in their own future.

[Donna Linton]

I've seen a lot of that at my place of employment too. We will hire people on temporary work contracts. Twelve weeks is usually the maximum, which doesn't do us a whole lot of good, because they get trained and off they go. I've had two adults come back and say that I've given such awesome references that it actually landed them a job.

Another thing I want to let you folks representing the federal government know about is the summer student program. For the entire 17 years we've had this placement, I've always chosen to hire somebody from an economically depressed background. It tends to be the oldest child in a single-parent family. There are five other kids. My current summer student is returning for her fifth year. Let me tell you what $2,000 a year has done for her family and for getting this kid through school. She is now going into human services, and it's probably in direct correlation with her employment with us during the summer.

I understand that program is going.... We were one of the groups that were told one year that we couldn't have any. I'm going to go back and check on it. I'd like to see priority given to organizations such as ours that choose students from families in which there is only one income. As far as an indicator of poverty, if you're anywhere below $20,000, you're there. If there's only one income for your household, even if it's above $20,000, you're there. Those are the families I see. Of the 200 families and 300 kids that come in every month, we're seeing families with only one income today. It is very hard to manage.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Go ahead, Sue.

[Sue Rickards]

I just wanted to mention an example. I was working with some families who were living in non-profit housing in a small community. They were being persecuted by their neighbours because they were welfare bums, blah, blah, blah. They told me the only way they could live comfortably in that community and be accepted would be if they were working.

This is where I first got really keen on the social enterprise idea, because work is about so much more than money. Of course, it is about money, but it's also about how we define ourselves. The fact that you have a job means that somebody needs you. You have responsibility. It's all about responsibility.

The upshot of that was that we started a business. It was called Born Again J.E.A.N.S. We collected old clothes, and these ladies made new things out of them. We ran it for about six years. It never supported them fully, but we managed to cobble together employment programs and stuff. It was primarily funded by my mother, actually. In the end, two families exited the welfare system totally. They have never been back. They would die before they would go back. Their children went to school and finished high school. The spinoffs were awesome.

This is why I'm really so enthusiastic about this approach. It is not the therapeutic, “Oh, you poor thing, here, have this free and this free.” People have to be valued. When they're not valued, when they have no responsibility, when nobody needs them, that's when they get into trouble. That's what I've seen, in my experience.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you.

I want to ask Monica a question. I guess my time is about running out.

I was very interested in hearing about the businesses in the community becoming involved in dealing with some of the issues, and in particular taking some ownership of what they were doing. You suggested some tax policies that may be helpful in helping that concept along. Maybe you could elaborate on that a little bit.

I know my time's up, so I'll quit there, although I have some other things I'd like to ask you about.

[Monica Chaperlin]

Did you say “tax policies”?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

That's right, for business. I think it was income tax policy that you were referring to.

[Monica Chaperlin]

You might be surprised to learn that the Business Community Anti-Poverty Initiative Inc. very much believes in a living wage, and that business has to share the responsibility.

However, things like a reduction in the GST or a reduction in our tax rate here in New Brunswick weren't things that really excited the Business Community Anti-Poverty Initiative. As I said, it is nice to have these things, but it's not helping. We're seeing severe cuts and changes now as a result of these tax cuts. They are really hurting.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

So what would you suggest for a tax policy?

[Monica Chaperlin]

Why not put back that 1% in GST and focus it specifically on social development? Why not?

We've got to invest this money. It costs money to do this, to make this change. We can't do it without it. We can't expect departments to turn themselves inside out and change, because they don't. When you're creating a new way of doing things, you need new investment dollars to be able to show how to do it, and then we will make savings down the road.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

We have two more questioners, Mr. Savage and Mr. Lobb. They have five minutes each to finish up.

Mr. Savage, the floor is yours.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I am going to ask you something that I didn't ask anybody else.

The preface is that probably the most remarkable person I have met in my life is a woman named Ingrid Munro, from Denmark. She was in charge of the African Housing Fund and had retired, but a group of about 50 street beggars from Nairobi came to her and asked her to provide help. These were women who had nothing. She started a microfinance organization called Jamii Bora.

The other side of that was a woman named Beatrice, who was 50 years old and blind. She had seven children and twelve grandchildren. In the space of two years, all seven children died of AIDS and tuberculosis, and she was left with the grandchildren. She thought she would put arsenic in their porridge. She told us this in Nairobi. Alexa McDonough was with me.

Instead she borrowed the equivalent of $20 U.S. from this microfinance organization. She now has four businesses. These are not Coca-Cola or GM. She sells fruits and vegetables. She's a landlord and does things like that.

Could a model like that work?

The other thing that Ingrid said, and Ingrid is not a soft old lefty, is that people ask how we take people out of poverty. She said, “I can't take anybody out of poverty. They take themselves out, but we have to create the conditions.”

Microfinance works, and microcredit. Is there a model that could work here to assist people in poverty?

[Bethany Thorne-Dykstra]

We talked a little bit at a meeting just recently here in Moncton about social cooperatives. What I really liked about that idea was that you don't go into business alone, but with support from others, so these people who aren't used to doing business have support. They don't feel that they're taking all the risk. They don't feel intimidated by that when a group of people go together. I think that's a really interesting concept to look at.

The other thing I wanted to say is it doesn't have to be limited to people who are physically or mentally well. That's one thing I've learned from our group. We do have people who are actually disabled in our organization, and they are really contributing.

There are people who have many gifts and talents, but the way our society is designed, they just don't have the opportunities to show them. Someone may never do a 40-hour week. They may not be physically capable of doing that, but if someone can give you 10 good hours and you can find four people to do 10 good hours, you've still got a lot of work done.

There are ways to do it, but we need to do more thinking outside of the box to be able to do it. In the business world today it is about productivity. It is about watching your margins and everything else, and I understand that, so there needs to be another design where these people fit and are given dignity and quality of life.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Absolutely.

One of the criticisms of microcredit was that they said it doesn't work for the poorest of the poor because you're talking about such small amounts of money that you can't track it, but this Jamii Bora organization has 170,000 clients. They've now got to the point that they actually provide health insurance for these people. They've taken over an old Catholic hospital that was abandoned by the nuns and they are now providing health insurance. It's a great model, and it has tracked....

I'm not sure, Sue, if you were going to--

[Sue Rickards]

We have a community loan fund in Saint John that makes micro loans and has been very successful in that regard.

I believe we need some sort of investment in the training business, the social enterprise. The best example is HRDA from Halifax, which you must be familiar with, which has started over 20 businesses in 20 years, or something like that; people who were on assistance or on welfare were working in the companies and then some of them spun them off. It's a fabulous model. This is what we've been trying to emulate on a very small scale, because we haven't had the resources, but we're hopeful that we will get some social enterprise policy and programming in place in the next couple of years.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

This is not something the banks are interested in doing. It's not something most financial institutions are interested in doing. It's probably too small for ACOA to be interested in doing. But it seems to me that if we set up some kind of a social economy model that invested in people and gave them an opportunity, on small amounts of money in a lot of cases--